matrix

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states inputs are 2D number arrays and lists ops, but does not describe output format, error handling, shape constraints, or side effects. For example, it doesn't clarify that some ops may return complex numbers. Minimal disclosure beyond schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with two sentences and an example. It front-loads the purpose, then lists ops, mentions unsupported SVD, and gives input requirements. Well-structured and no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of multiple ops and no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview but lacks details on return values, constraints (e.g., square matrices for determinant), and error conditions. It is adequate but incomplete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so description must explain parameters. It clarifies that inputs are 2D number arrays and that binary ops require both 'a' and 'b'. It also lists op values and gives an example. However, it does not explain what each operation does in detail, leaving some ambiguity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Performs matrix operations' and lists many specific operations (multiply, add, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling math tools (evaluate, simplify, solve) by focusing on matrix operations. However, it could be more explicit that this tool is exclusively for matrix operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like 'solve' or 'statistics'. It mentions that SVD is not supported and binary ops require both 'a' and 'b', but does not compare with siblings or provide context for choosing this tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.